Has Honda's run - run out?

stickguy

saw in the notes section of the last issue of motor trend that they claim that Honda is developing a V8 for the 2010-2011 next generations of the RL and Ridgeline. Supposed to be all aluminum, 4.2-4.4l, with vtec and VCM.

No word if it will fit in an S2000.

ateixeira

Monster Miata style, LOL.

But nah, that would be too nose heavy. Small roadsters rely very heavily on light weight.

-juice

anythngbutgm

J/K about the V8 S2k. I wouldn't give up the I4 anyways and for some reason, S4000 doesn't have the same ring to it... But it's nice to hear that they are working on it. I wonder if it will actually pan out though with rising gas prices?

Knowing them they'll probably sacrifice low end power for fuel economy. And in typical tradition you'll have to wind the hell out of it to get the most from the motor, but it WILL be a blast to drive and durable. I can't wait!!!

stickguy

just kidding, but from what you read, it almost doesn't matter how big a lump it is, as long as Honda can say they have a V8!

Probably wouldn't get much worse mileage on the Ridge than the V6 does, which isn't very good. I assume it would have to be a bit torquier though.

But, since the 3.5 is already smooth and opwerful, not sure how much of an improvement it would be.

In the RL, it would be more for bragging rights. At list the Ridge is a "truck" so it could be of some practical value. Maybe a Ridgeline Duelie??

anythngbutgm

I actually am one who doesn't mind the "no V8" policy at Honda. I think the 3.5l (like my MDX) is perfectly adequate; smooth, refined, plenty of power. And with the rising gas prices, I think Honda might have been smart to maximize the usage of their V6 engines in place of a V8 so that they don't get caught relying on the "Bigger is Better" syndrome when sales drop off. But a Honda V8 does sound pretty sweet.

One of the reasons they could be "giving in" is to quell the criticism that Honda has from the public. I constantly read/hear how Honda is "lame" for not giving the power savvy customers what they want. They'll never be able to compete with Lexus,MB, or BMW with a measly V6. In some cases, that's true I guess. Bragging rights, sure as long as it meets the 300+ hp barrier that exists in cars like the M45, LS46... In this segment, I think they'll come through with a gem.

In the truck end, I have a suspicion that the V8 will still fall short in the "grunt" compared to the 5.4 Ford or Nissan for instance. I think the fuel efficiency is going to be more of a priority than stump pulling power... I could be wrong and Honda could be building a 8mpg Torque monster, who knows

Ridgeline duelie. Awesome.

grbeck

The GM dealers around here are pretty much out of 2005 models, although some are now stocking up on 2006 models. Still, total inventories are down considerably from levels in early summer.

The $64,000 (or I guess $64 million) question is whether this latest promotion has actually given GM a real boost or merely borrowed sales from future months.

I'm anxious to see the new Civic and the facelifted Accord...I'm guessing that they will be on the lots by Labor Day weekend?

ateixeira

Thing is, it goes against their grain. Honda has always built efficient, small engines that are geared properly and attached to relatively light vehicles.

Another thing - the focus has usually been on efficiency and low emissions, not brute force. They easily exceed CAFE standards for instance. This has been their philosophy for ages.

The Ridgeline itself is a significant break from the usual Honda design, a V8 would be an even bigger departure.

Though I can understand that customers are asking for a V8, I think it might be too out of character. Traditional buyers in that segment will want a big pushrod V8 anyway, I'm not convinced they could conquer those loyal buyers.

-juice

stickguy

True that Honda used to be the efficiency company. Problem is, they have gone away from that recently to appeal to the massess.

The new Ody is ~4,400 -4,500#s, the Pilot about the same, and the Ridgeline even more than that I think. The RL breaks 2 tons too. So, not the light and nimble cars they used to be.

I still have hopes that the new Civic stays faithful, even though it will probably put on a couple hundred pounds (safety and comfort aint light). The new 1.8l sounds like a real Honda motor (mpg like a 1.5, power like a 2.0). Gear it right and get a real nice mileage/performance combo.

Hondas, to me, have always been better at real world (usable) performance, unlike some makers that seem to generate good test numbers that don't seem to translate into normal driving.

feel is just as imortant to ultimate speed too. How many people really run their family sedan up to the redline pulling away from stoplights anyway?

ateixeira

True, the Ody is bulky, but it still has the best fuel economy among vans.

I believe Honda has the highest CAFE for any brand, at least for its cars.

-juice

varmint

Honda's current and projected fuel economy average for their light truck fleet (05-07 model years) is 24.4 mpg. This is based on data they supplied to the NHTSA for the new CAFE regulations. For reference...

Toyota's average is 22.9
Nissan's is 20.7
Hyundai's is 21.8
Subaru's is 25.7

I don't have the averages for their complete product lines handy.

For my part, I think we're seeing news of a V10 (which comes first) and a possible V8 because Honda has found ways to make them more fuel efficient. They've made numerous gains in technology in recent years. For example, V8 with VCM may be as fuel efficient as a V6 without.

FWIW, according to Gary Flint (Ridgeline LPL) the Ridgeline could not make effective use of a V6 with VCM because the truck was too heavy and not aerodynamic enough. It would almost never run on 3 cylinders. But a V8 running on four cyls might do the trick.

Also, Honda had very few vehicles in need of a V8 until recently. The old RL wasn't worth it. The MDX was really the only player which could have used a V8, but that was selling like gangbusters without it. Now, with the Ridgeline and new RL, they have a more legitimate need.

varmint

Good points regarding the 2005 market. I think another caveat worth noting is that the numbers are based on only the first 2 weeks of August.

ateixeira

I remember in an Edmunds poll that was the #1 thing that potential Ody owners liked about it (pre-release). It got my vote.

How's real-world mileage, though? I heard some complaints that it wasn't in VCM mode very often. CR's test van wasn't any more efficient than the Sienna.

-juice

nippononly

you have to be the type to do a lot highway travelling to get any real use out of VCM. In a minivan, that might be exactly what you use the vehicle for, so that is a good thing, but I bet it hardly gets any operation during typical errand runs in the city.

rsholland

Yeah, I would agree to that. I think in stop-n-go driving and commuting, VCM will be of little use. Interstate driving with the "Cruise" set is where it will come into play—and how often will that be in terms of the average vehicle's life?

Bob

nippononly

in a minivan that will be a bigger portion of the vehicle's life than most other types of vehicles. They make great interstate cruisers.

explorerx4

i did a lot of driving in pa last weekend. i wonder how much it (cylinder cuttoff) would help on all those hills.

gee35coupe

Probably a lot. Most hills have 2 sides.

ateixeira

For me, well, we do a *lot* of road trips. Question is would the vehicle have a light enough load that it would even go into VCM mode. We don't pack light, and there are at least 4 people plus a dog with us every time.

I'm sure this technology will be fine-tuned and do better and better. I love the concept.

-juice

nippononly

if Odyssey had a V-8 with VCM, it would run in VCM mode a lot on the highway, even loaded down.

With only the V-6, I am curious too as to how often it would idle three cylinders. There is a little light that tells you when it is doing so, right? Juice, you will have to test drive one to tell us how much you could get VCM to work for you! :-)

explorerx4

i guess what you are saying is the the cylinders would shut off going down a hill, saving gas. i wonder what affect that would have on engine braking, if any?

boomchek

Since I go on many Odyssey test drives I can give you some insight as to how often it goes into three cylinders.

On our mostly flat test drive route about 60% of the time the Ody will be in 3 cyl. mode. That's if you take it easy on the gas. Even with 4 or 5 passengers inside (usually a family and myself on the test drive) the only time you're in V6 mode is when you accelerate, or go up a small hill, or just give it a little boot. Otherwise when coasting, and even when speeding up a few mph 40-45, it will stay in 3 cyl mode as long as you're easy on the gas. Slowing down to a stop it will go in 3 cyl mode as well, but at a traffic light (complete stop) it will be in V6 mode probably cause it knows it will have to accelerate soon.

ateixeira

I assume you'd have about half as much engine braking - 3 cylinders compressing instead of 6. The other 3 would have all the valves closed.

I wonder up until what speeds VCM would be in effect if you're in cruise control on a level surface. 65? 75? If so that would be great.

I'm not sure how CR's test loop is, but their mileage was not as good as I'd expected.

-juice

varmint

How much gas do you think you're using going downhill? Sure, three of the cylinders will be shut down by VCM, but you'd hardly have your foot on the pedal anyway. A V6 coasting downhill isn't using much gas to begin with. While coasting downhill, VCM might prevent pumping losses, but that's not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

I'm pretty sure most of the gains come when cruising at constant speeds, like on level highways.

ateixeira

Potentially it won't use hardly any gas at all even in the 3 active cylinders, if you are off the throttle.

-juice

carlisimo

Engine braking is bad for emissions (and presumably for mileage, therefore), so the current trend is to minimize it.

I wouldn't expect too much of it in any eco-friendlier engine.

explorerx4

varm...
my question about downhill driving is more about engine braking than gas consumption. will the vcm make it more like a 'freewheeling' scenario? this is not specifically a honda question.
if so, you are going to go through brakes sooner. i can see manufacturers being ok with this, but consumers less so.

rsholland

http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103069

varmint

Yeah, your concern is a different issue. Since the valves of three cylinders are closed when VCM is active, I assume they are sealed. In which case, the volume of "air" in the combustion chamber would be neutral - it would compress and rebound with the motion of the piston.

Honestly, I have no idea if that would make a significant difference in engine braking. In theory, the amount of force required to compress the air would be the same as the force applied when the piston rebounds.

mariner7

Rankings according to Harbour

Nissan $1826
Toyota 1499
Honda 1203
Chrysler 186
Ford -139
GM -1227

These include all divisions. How the heck does Nissan manage such big profits? If it's more efficient than Toyota, which I doubt, it's only marginally. Its transaction price per vehicle is certainly less than Toy. So where do the profits come from?

What can Honda do to catch up?

dino001

It is in assembly. A read somewhere that Nissan achieved shortest assebly times for their vehicles, pretty much across the board, but especially Altima. There is also supplier aspect - their components are cheaper, which showed in early quality problems with Altimas, Titans and Armadas. They addressed many of them, but general quality of Nissans had actually dropped in early "zeroes", before it improved recently.

I wonder if they add warranty costs in that profitability picture. I doubt it - usually what counts is what happens today and may happen tomorrow. Yesterday is well, yesterday's news.

ateixeira

Give credit to Carlos "le cost cutter" Ghosn. IMO the cost cutting is a bit obvious, the interiors aren't up to the level of the others. But they have an exciting product so the formula works.

Honda is doing fine, by that chart is looks like Ford and Chrysler have a thing or two to learn from them.

I've seen other charts, usually Porsche tops the list. Nissan/Renault was 2nd and Toyota was 3rd. So maybe your list only included high volume brands.

-juice

andre1969

most cars have virtually no engine braking when they're in top gear anyway, so I don't think shutting off a couple of cylinders is going to make much difference. You're still going to have the drag of the engine components, transmission, axles, and everything else that rotates. Plus, even when you shut down a few cylinders, the pistons are still moving, aren't they? Or have they found some kind of way to actually make them disconnect? Sounds like that would be a timing nightmare to design, though.

varmint

The Harbour report does not include data from Honda's most recently constructed lines. I know it doesn't include all of Toyota's, but I'm not sure which. No idea about the rest.

Nissan's plant in Tenn. has always been very profitable. Ghosn made things things even more so. I believe the truck line (BOF designs cost comparatively little to build) is a big reason for Nissan's profit average.

A few years back, Honda revamped the lines in Ohio. They now have a flexible manufacturing system where they can build pretty much anything they want in those factories. As the press put it, Honda "stunned" the industry by switching the Accord line over from the 02 model to the 03 model in one weekend.

It probably costs more to build cars this way, but they have a big advantage in flexibility.

varmint

"Plus, even when you shut down a few cylinders, the pistons are still moving, aren't they? Or have they found some kind of way to actually make them disconnect?"

Yes, the pistons are still moving. So their mass is still a drag. The only question is whether or not they have to do much compressing during that motion.

fintail

Here's a good Honda story....a longtime friend of mine bought a 03 Accord V6 EX coupe in October or November of 02. He drives a lot, so it has about 70K on it now. Well, weekend before last it puked up a transmission. He bought a big warranty, so it was all covered. And then last week, before he got it back, the dealer told him the "engine computer" failed (he's not very mechanically apt, so he didn't know what it all means) , and that whatever it was had to be replaced too. He got it back yesterday...and I guess the warranty got to cover over 10K in repairs. He was going to dump the car in light of rising gas prices...but now he might keep it.

nippononly

As much as I love Hondas in general, I would NEVER recommend a used one with an automatic to a friend. Based on personal experience buying and selling cars as a sideline for more than a decade, and also on all the anecdotal evidence coming out of the woodwork the last five years about the trannies behind the V-6. With a dash of friends with problematic Honda automatics thrown in for flavor.

Owning them new and babying them is one thing, buying used from a stranger or worse yet, a dealer, is quite another.

hpmctorque

Correct me if I'm wrong, Nippon, but isn't the 5-speed automatic, introduced in the '00 model year, the only problematic tranny? And, more specifically, aren't these problematic only when used with V6s? If so, this accounts for a significant amount of Honda's current and recent production, and even more of Acura's, but that would leave a lot of used Hondas and Acuras outside this troublesome universe. In addition, it appears that the '04 and newer V6 automatics are okay, and that the problem has been fixed, or is the jury still out on this? Certainly Honda's silence, denial, and lack of communication on this matter hardly promotes confidence.

ateixeira

That's affecting used car prices, too. Used TLs can be had for cheap. I think V6/Auto was how most of them came.

-juice

nippononly

Well, the jury is still out here at my house, but I am expecting Honda to make design changes to insure this problem does not continue into the future. Actually, I am surprised Honda would design in a problem this widespread and/or severe (severe in the sense that it has required one or sometimes several transmission replacements on affected cars before 100K miles).

But no, I am not just talking about hose transmissions. Honda automatics have always been fairly fragile, IMO. I have friends who dumped their 90s-era Civic automatics before 100K because the auto trans went belly up. I had problems in the past buying Honda automatics and having to make expensive repairs on cars with odos still in the five digits.

I think if you baby them and maintain them strictly to the book specs, you can probably do yourself a big favor. But most people don't do that (baby their car, I mean....actually most don't follow the book maintenance schedule perfectly either), and when they DON'T do that in their Toyota, it doesn't result in the need for a replacement tranny at 85K anywhere near as often, IMO.

fintail

I'll say one thing about Honda though, they honored the warranty without batting an eye. His previous car, a 92 Accord he ran up to about 220K, never had its tranny touched saved for servicing.

rsholland

http://hondanews.com/CatID2010

ateixeira

I love the coupe, they kept it pretty close to the sharp-looking concept. I'm not sure I like the seperate speedo or the odd steering wheel. The rear looks very clean, so I'll give the overall package an A-.

The sedan isn't as successful. Why not use the coupe's nose, this looks like a Saturn Ion, not exactly something you want people to think of. The 2 spoke steering wheel is a train wreck, just awful. They tried to make the hybrid stand out a little more, and did so-so. The rear end is a mess. I give it a C+.

TOV has tons o' photos.

-juice

varmint

I was digging through the press material on the new Civic Hybrid and came across this.

"Since the electric motor, which also acts as an electric generator, is attached directly to the crankshaft of the engine, the engine needs to provide as little resistance as possible during deceleration to allow the generator to produce high levels of electricity and charge the batteries. In a traditional engine, the pumping action of the cylinders will actually provide a moderate amount of resistance, or "engine braking," during deceleration. VCM virtually eliminates that effect." [emphasis added]

Keeping in mind that it's press material, it sounds like engine braking would be significantly reduced.

For the hybrid, that makes sense. You want the electric motor (which is also the generator) to get as much rotation as possible. It helps to charge the batteries.

nippononly

the sedan's nose looks very similar to the coupe's I think (and also similar to a Saturn Ion, or perhaps a shrunken version of the old L-car). I like the new pics of the sedan much better than the camo'd ones I saw before.

The looks have taken three steps forward from the '01-'05, IMHO. Overall, the car is more competitive than the '01 was when it first came out, although they made no attempt to equip the DX did they? Still no A/C, and now no radio either? And the only one in the line to use smaller rims, as well as lots of other little deletes (the only one on the whole line not to have auto up/down driver's window, for instance - how much could that cost?).

It does, however, have all the safety equipment standard, including ABS, SAB, and side curtain airbags. Also, the whole line including the lowly DX now has tilt and telescopic steering wheel - a nice touch.

How did the SI, which appears to use the RSX-S's powertrain pretty much wholesale, end up three points lower in fuel economy? 22/31 aint that great. But I like that the rest of the line gets 40 mpg highway with the auto.

varmint

The sedan is growing on me. I've always liked the coupe. Funny thing is... I prefer the lights on the back of the sedan, but the shape of the rear is much better on the coupe.

I agree that certain lines look like the ION. I made the same remark over at TOV a while back. It has the same "smile" created by the lights and grill. That's the part that is ION-like. But I think when you see it in person the rake of the winshield will distract your eye from being focused on the bumper. How much time do you spend looking at the bumper from eye level?

As for comparisons with the coupe, the only significant difference is the lower 1/3 of the front facade. The Coupe Si has intakes on the side and a slightly higher crease at the corners (the ION has lights in that spot, making it more like the coupe than the sedan). Again, you'd have to be on a creeper to be focused on something that low.

varmint

To help illustrate when I was writing.

http://i.tnpv.us/pv/2005/08/29/HON2005082947805_pv.jpg

http://i.tnpv.us/pv/2005/08/29/HON2005082946094_pv.jpg

and just for kicks, here's an ION

http://a904.g.akamai.net/7/904/506/v0011/images.autobytel.com/view/aic/SATURN/ION/sdn/usa_- 2005_saturn_ion_sdn_4_x_exfrdrvr75_x.jpg

rsholland

I disagree. I like the sedan's rear.

Bob

grbeck

I like the coupe. Very sharp and sporty, just what the Civic lineup needed.

The sedan, on the other hand...

The back end is nice - very neat and tidy, even a little upscale. The problem is the front...the coupe's bumper at least LOOKS sleeker, thanks to the "intakes" mounted on each side of the grille. These intakes also break up the mass of the front bumper.

The sedan's front bumper lacks these intakes, which gives it a bulky look, and also emphasizes the forward slant of the bumper. The result is a cross between a Saturn Ion and the prow of a locomotive.

The low-mounted, forward-slanted side accent strip makes it impossible to mount a protective strip on the side of the car without it looking awkward. Not a good idea, given the propensity of Hondas to collect door dings, and the increasing number of SUVs and trucks on the road. If anything, door protection needs to be mounted HIGHER than ever.

I'll render a final judgment on the sedan when I see it in real life, but I am a little worried. It definitely looks more upscale than the 2001-05 Civic, but whether it is a total improvement remains to be seen.

anonymousposts

like the looks. That white EX coupe and silver EX sedan are enough to make me want one. I had my doubts, especially with the two spoke steering wheel and digital odometer. However, the other aspects of the car outweigh the items that I have concerns about. I will also hold my final judgement for an actual sighting and seat inside but so far I like what I see.

stickguy

I like a lot of things about the EX sedan. The silver looks sharp, and the blue in the official pictures (don't know which one it is) also looks classy.

The exterior is fine IMO. Sure you could tweak it, but it sure ain't no Aztec!

The insides I need to see and try out. Looks comfortable (and the first reviews seem to bear this out). The dash? Well, I'll reserve judgement until I see it in person. I think I can live with the steering wheel too, since it does resemble the wheel in the Mni, and I had no problem with that.